The 2nd Womble wrote:I'd argue that motorists are going to realise we're intent on fixing the problem ourselves and are actually capable of being given a bit more credit.

Who says there is a problem? Cyclists running is not a problem. Cyclists getting hit by cars is.

You actually have to ask that question? Further to your question, you're then suggesting that the only issue that affects cyclists is the behaviour of motorists? I guess someone who continues to argue MHL's for 2 years straight without relent could handle himself admirably here, but it would be utterly worthless to the rest of us. A rediculoous POV, particularly given that cycling groups and individuals worldwide are all singing a similar tune to ours in the last month or so. Where has the blame game gotten anyone up to this point? No one is blameless, and nothing is ever so black and white.

You haven't answered the question. What is the big problem caused by cyclists running red lights? What is this similar tune?

The 2nd Womble wrote:I'd argue that motorists are going to realise we're intent on fixing the problem ourselves and are actually capable of being given a bit more credit.

Who says there is a problem? Cyclists running is not a problem. Cyclists getting hit by cars is.

You actually have to ask that question? Further to your question, you're then suggesting that the only issue that affects cyclists is the behaviour of motorists? I guess someone who continues to argue MHL's for 2 years straight without relent could handle himself admirably here, but it would be utterly worthless to the rest of us. A rediculoous POV, particularly given that cycling groups and individuals worldwide are all singing a similar tune to ours in the last month or so. Where has the blame game gotten anyone up to this point? No one is blameless, and nothing is ever so black and white.

You haven't answered the question. What is the big problem caused by cyclists running red lights? What is this similar tune?

I will continue to ignore red lights as a pedestrian and a cyclist when they are serving no safety purpose and there is no inconvenience caused by my actions to others. If running red lights is what causes motorists to be hostile to cyclists then they must damn well hate pedestrians!

You are concentrating on an largely irrelevant issue to cycling safety that isn't going to get 'solved' by your campaign rather than focussing on the "real issues" (your words not mine!) in cycling safety. Furthermore you are reinforcing the idea that cyclists running red lights is a pressing problem that needs to be solved. That isn't good PR for cyclists.

To think that the few motorists that hate cyclists are gonna have their minds changed because of the perception that all cyclists obey all red lights, is naive in the extreme. The middle aged well to do looking bloke in the expensive european sedan that nearly ran me off the edge of Galston gorge this morning, then gave me the finger as he went around the switchback was not angry at a cyclist running a red light. He is a small minded immature fool with no comprehension or understanding of anyone's presence outside his own sheltered privileged little world. It is a problem with our society but it is not cyclists fault.

jimsheedy wrote:To think that the few motorists that hate cyclists are gonna have their minds changed because of the perception that all cyclists obey all red lights, is naive in the extreme. The middle aged well to do looking bloke in the expensive european sedan that nearly ran me off the edge of Galston gorge this morning, then gave me the finger as he went around the switchback was not angry at a cyclist running a red light. He is a small minded immature fool with no comprehension or understanding of anyone's presence outside his own sheltered privileged little world. It is a problem with our society but it is not cyclists fault.

+1

Furthermore all those motorists who simply don't look for cyclists or don't know how to drive appropriately around cyclists aren't instantly going to learn if a few extra cyclists stop for red lights.

And I still haven't answered your question. The problem with cyclists running red lights is that those cyclists ride with your attitiudes, which in turn influence driver/pedestrian/other cyclists-sick-of-being-stereotyped-thanks-to-your-behaviour's attitudes. Those attitudes influence driver behaviour in particular, and I - in addition to a large number of like minded cyclists - have simply had enough of the current situation. We've had enough of the general public calling for the registration of cyclists due to the behaviour of those who simply don't give a !! BAN ME NOW FOR SWEARING !! how their riding affects the rest of us. We've had enough of being buzzed. We've had enough of being assaulted or threatened with assault. We've had enough of keeping our mouths shut in social situations for "fear" of enciting the inevitable boring neanderthal anti cyclist monologues from those who's mindsets immediately change once they know what we do for kicks.The groundswell of support is out there for such a move. your ignorance of it doesn't negate it's existance.

So if ignoring red lights are the cause of so much hate and trouble why aren't pedestrians facing the same problems?

The 2nd Womble wrote:It may not be an issue to you, but that is the problem.

Yet in your own words running red lights is not a "real issue".

The 2nd Womble wrote:We've had enough of the general public calling for the registration of cyclists due to the behaviour of those who simply don't give a showtime how their riding affects the rest of us. We've had enough of being buzzed. We've had enough of being assaulted or threatened with assault. We've had enough of keeping our mouths shut in social situations for "fear" of enciting the inevitable boring neanderthal anti cyclist monologues from those who's mindsets immediately change once they know what we do for kicks.

I'm not a fan of that either. But I'm not naive enough to think that stopping at red lights will change any of that.

Last edited by human909 on Sun Aug 19, 2012 9:28 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Running reds is not a problem.... but you are making it one !!!! Its societies poor excuse of blaming cyclist, and to take away attention of the things that really matters.. And you foolishy fall for this trap...

Running reds is not playing a mayor role in cycling safety.Dont be fooled.

You are doing good work.. dont waste it on this trivial stuff.....

The dutch have one word to describe the aussie MHL, this word is ;SCHIJNVEILIGHEID !!

Much as I admire the sentiment and am mostly happy to obey the laws of the land, no matter how poorly constructed and irrelevant they may be I still strongly believe that the misbehaviour of a minority of riders is more a hook upon which a small but noisy proportion of non riders may hang their bigotry. It makes a refreshing change from "Yew doan pay rairjoe, git orf moi roadddz."

We may well become immaculate paragons of virtue in our behaviour but we will still be hated and reviled by this small but vocal beyond their worth tribe of intolerants because we are not like them. We exercise our freedom as we exercise our bodies, our choice to exist in the wind instead of a cage makes us a part of the landscape through which we pass not merely an observer who remains inside even while they are outside. They do not understand why or how this can be and rather than join us in our sweaty endorphin enriched communion with the world around us they would have us descend to their level of self imposed incarceration in the mistaken belief that this would somehow assuage their unrecognised feelings of disempowerment. They cannot win so they would have all lose.

...whatever the road rules, self-preservation is the absolute priority for a cyclist when mixing it with motorised traffic.London Boy 29/12/2011

For what its worth I don't go around running red lights and pissing off motorists left right and centre. But nor can I say I hand on heart say that I obey every letter or the law. Who here for example doesn't have a bell on all their bikes?

I try to ride assertively yet cooperatively. I smile and wave and pay due respect to motorists who give me respect. Largely I do not have problems while riding on the roads. But to demonise red light when it is almost always done in a harmless and sensible fashion by cyclists is counter productive.

The 2nd Womble wrote:Thanks for the advice BNAers. We have taken all of this into account thanks to you lot The original Red posters are still going to be used on the day, however they will more likely be used in cyclist friendly cafe's and other more commonly frequented spots where we can take the time to absorb them at our leasure, and in A2 size where possible.We are working on a more eye grabbing version of this as well which will also help reinforce everyones obligations out on the black stuff. The typical traffic yellow base, with the three lines being red, amber and green

That's much better, 6 words as someone else said. Change the type though, you want something more like the original poster, tall, san serif and very quick to read.

I also like the message better as it doesn't single out cyclists. It puts forward a very coherent case very quickly.

I still don't understand this notion that we just break the road rules when we judge it is harmless. What happens when it isn't harmless? I know we will still be criticised, but we don't have to supply the morons with grist for their mill.

While I may or may not agree with h909 and damh, I ended up in hospital trying to bite off a little more orange light than I could chew 4 weeks ago. It's not overly good practice, but regardless, SCA is doing something positive. I like the second bluey poster, the colours are hard to read but it says something useful. Must not place them illegally though... it's clearly a cycle positive poster and that makes the haterz do what they do best if they think there is antisocial behaviour in the advertising.

Oxford wrote:everything's harmless and sensible until someone gets hurt. and someone does get hurt eventually despite every good intention.

No oxford. What you're implying is not true.

I can safely negotiate hundreds of intersections without traffic lights but looking out for traffic. I can safely lane change, merge and ride amongst cars because I use my head and look out for traffic. Why do you suggest that an empty intersection with no approaching traffic is dangerous to enter simply because of the colour of a light?

None of us are invincible. But lets not twist the truth simply because it is law.

Oxford wrote:you're missing the point, its easy to hate on a whole minority group or marginalise them based on the actions of a minority of that minority group. not sure if you're naturally obtuse or choosing to be, but going by your postings it has to be one or the other.

Quite true. But it isn't because some cyclists go through traffic lights. Many motorists dislike cyclists simply because they are on 'their' roads. Of course they won't write this in the posts, instead they'll call attention to illegal things.

Years ago now, but the circumstances were my wife & I were riding with an unfamiliar group of >>>>experienced riders<<<< who decided to safely negotiate an intersection (yes against the red light).

We were back about 50m & as I slowed to check the intersection to avoid being squashed by a fast approaching car to my left, my Wife unfortunately >>>>less experienced<<<<attempted to go with the group & rear ended me hitting the deck. The momentum of the group had her wanting to proceed & possibly my signalling to slow or calling car on the left was ignored (hello darling), but the result of not stopping at the red light speaks for it self. Broken clavicle, chunk of eye brow hacked off by the above glasses when the vent closed, deep grazes etc etc.

I have witnessed other very similar situations where one person proceeds & the rest follow in oblivion like lemmings.

I almost caused a lady to be run down as I j-walked across a busy intersection in the CBD. I turned to the sound of screeching tyres to see a car just miss the back of her heel as she followed me. Yes she was silly for following me, but I was also irresponsible for walking against the little red man in the first place.

I stand by NND. When I see 43 cyclists run 2 cycles of lights at one of inner city Brisbanes most notorious intersections during peak traffic on a weekday morning, in my opinion and everyone elses, those 43 cyclists have no place on any road regardless of the mode of transport they use. This behaviour is morally and legally wrong. It contributes as much as any other factor to how we have to ride now as opposed to 20 years ago. End of story.

ZepinAtor wrote:This is what happens when OTHER cyclist run red lights.

There was a bunch of silly actions in that little story including cyclists tailgating other cyclists and behaving like lemmings rather than talking responsibility for yourself. It had very little to do with a red light. What the same thing occurred at a STOP sign?

The 2nd Womble wrote:in my opinion and everyone elses, those 43 cyclists have no place on any road regardless of the mode of transport they use.

You speak for everybody now womble?

The 2nd Womble wrote:This behaviour is morally and legally wrong.

I'm curious. What moral code is being broken here?

Is it morally wrong if there if nobody is around to see it?Is it morally wrong for a cyclist not to have a bike equipped with a bell?Is it morally wrong to ride a bike without a helmet?Is it morally wrong for pedestrians to cross against a red man?

ZepinAtor wrote:This is what happens when OTHER cyclist run red lights.

There was a bunch of silly actions in that little story including cyclists tailgating other cyclists and behaving like lemmings rather than talking responsibility for yourself. It had very little to do with a red light. What the same thing occurred at a STOP sign?

You're absolutely correct. It had very little to do with the red light.

If your morals allow you to break the law (and it is the law for most of them in most states, so no arguments there), then I question your moral integrity as a person.

I question your morally basis if you EVER let the law dictate morals to you. Laws can be wrong, very wrong be it in Nazi Germany, Apartheid or modern Australia.

Personally I feel quite comfortable with my set of morals. In fact I (and others around me) would consider me to be and ethical and moral person. I am not Christian, but I do believe a good basis for life is 'Love thy neighbour' and 'Do unto others as you would have them do unto you'.

And you know what Human 909? I reckon you'd be the first to have a serious spit if things didn't go your way and you got carved-up in traffic and it was your own doing that caused it.

So assuming you drive a car is it also, by your logic, okay to drive without a seatbelt because it was (a) only a short distance and (b) you were not planning to drive fast? Okay to have a few drinks then drive home because you (a) know a back street and (b) it isn't very far or (c) you always drive better with a couple of beers under the belt.

Do you run red lights in your car like you do on your bike and if not, why not?

Does your car have an operating horn? If not, why not?

You see it doesn't matter about things being morally right or wrong it matters about them being socially or legally right or wrong because while the law can blanket a community no two people have the exact same moral compass.

As for The 2nd Womble, I might not agree with some of the things for which he campaigns I admire that he has the guts and the willingness to do those things.

he is trying to make a difference while you seem to be trying to make a mischief.

gorilla monsoon wrote:And you know what Human 909? I reckon you'd be the first to have a serious spit if things didn't go your way and you got carved-up in traffic and it was your own doing that caused it.

Baseless and unfair accusations.

gorilla monsoon wrote:So assuming you drive a car is it also, by your logic, okay to drive without a seatbelt because it was (a) only a short distance and (b) you were not planning to drive fast?

I don't have a moral objection to that at all.

gorilla monsoon wrote:Okay to have a few drinks then drive home because you (a) know a back street and (b) it isn't very far or (c) you always drive better with a couple of beers under the belt.

I have a moral objection to putting others at risk.

gorilla monsoon wrote:Do you run red lights in your car like you do on your bike and if not, why not?

I have no moral objection to cars going through red lights if there is no other traffic at all. I have don't it once on section of road where they installed a right turn arrow when one was previously not installed. Perfect visibility. I don't see how it was morally right last week but suddenly immoral this week.

gorilla monsoon wrote:You see it doesn't matter about things being morally right or wrong it matters about them being socially or legally right or wrong because while the law can blanket a community no two people have the exact same moral compass.

Since when have I argued otherwise? Since when have I disagreed with that law? It wasn't me who brought morals into this.

gorilla monsoon wrote:he is trying to make a difference while you seem to be trying to make a mischief.

I fear his 'difference' is to entrench that the notion that cyclists running red lights is common and that it is a terrible action if they do. I don't feel that it will reduce the numbers of cyclists running red lights. As far as I'm concerned it isn't helping.

"I fear his 'difference' is to entrench that the notion that cyclists running red lights is common and that it is a terrible action if they do". You don't fear that we haven't already been tarred with that brush years before you set digits to keyboard? From non forumites, all of whom ride a bike:

" It would kill me to think some !! BAN ME NOW FOR SWEARING !! p plater thinks its ok to side swipe my girl on her commute ride to work, just because he can justify it by watching some dinkus rider run a red in traffic".Thank you! Holy deal, I get so mad at all the bicyclists that do whatever the well they want, and then get mad when drivers don't give them more space. Ugh!""Ok, something else for my bike buddies - we are NOT racing on roads that are open to all. It only takes a second to stop and be safe at red lights and stop signs, PLUS it gives non biking car drivers one less thing to criticize about cyclists!""In California the fine of running a red light on a bicycle is $400. On every ride I take, I see 2 0r three cyclist doing it. That's because those riders "know what they are doing" red light are only a guide line to them, cause they are that good..""Please stop! It's the law and it upholds our image."" Yes, good. I stopped before an oncoming cyclist yesterday at a 4-way stop. She signaled to turn across my path before hitting the intersection, but then did not slow down and just turned right through with no regard of the fact that she just ran the stop sign and violated my right-of-way. That's okay, I knew it would happen, so I defensively waited."I like the fact that people cycle and enjoy it and keep themselves in shape doing it. I do not like it when they forget that while on the asphalt, their rules are the same as those of cars. I'm not even that strict of a rule-follower. But right-of-way and stopping at stop signals in traffic are safety principles.""As a cyclist, it really irritates me when I see other cyclists breaking the law. I told my kids when they were growing up and still tell the kids in my scout troop that the motorist you tick off may not take it out on you, but they're very likely to take it out on the next cyclist they come across."" I seriously think bike riders should be able to roll through lights like a giveway sign like buses in some cities, this would allow them to clear traffic, but until then stop at the bloody lights and get some practice track standing or clipping out and in "I lost count of the number of cyclists I saw riding through red lights in Melbourne. Please share a smart common sense approach."" Yes they should, so many cyclists go through the red lights and get all cyclists a bad name""Motorists hate cyclists for many reasons- some are for their own complete ignorance of the road rules and some are for cyclists' complete disregard for the road rules. You wouldn't run a red light in a car- don't do it on your bike. It won't solve all issues but you are just as ignorant as these motorists if you don't think it contributes to the problem.""yes do stop at the red light the few cyclists who go through red lights give a bad name to all the other law abiding cyclists."

That was 5 minutes of cutting and pasting from a small portion of the 89 shares the red poster received in just the first day on FB alone, and represents the very tip of the Ice Berg (literally thousands of comments from around the world) in terms of how fed up cyclists are with the minority ruining it for everyone else. You're trying to argue the point in the face of strong - very strong - public opinion including within our own ranks. BTW I haven't seen too many of your posts containing "IMO", nevertheless I don't make the assumption that you are necessarily stating fact in your posts. Please begin giving everyone else the same courtesy. It'll shorten alot of threads by a fair few pages if you think about things like a more well rounded objective cyclist.

My goal in cycling advocacy is to make it a safer place for all cyclists. I don't believe you campaign in any way helps achieve that. All it does it focus cyclists and motorists on a strawman argument when it comes to cycling safety.

Holland and Denmark and Germany haven't made cycling safer by forcing cyclists to wear helmets and feel guilty about the harmless law breaking of others.

As I have said before. I do avoid blatently running red lights at intersection when there are other vehicles around. I don't avoid it at 2:00am with no traffic in sight. However you campaign does make me want to do it while riding with no hands on the handlebars, without a helmet in front of Flinders St Station! (Some would call it mischief, I'd call it a protest. )

Who is online

About the Australian Cycling Forums

The largest cycling discussion forum in Australia for all things bike; from new riders to seasoned bike nuts, the Australian Cycling Forums are a welcoming community where you can ask questions and talk about the type of bikes and cycling topics you like.